Replacement front sight for Colt revolvers

[Kaido Ojamaa-VKV]

I like to use Uberti Remington NMA Front sights or Fiber Optic Sights which I have Master Black Powder Gunsmith Dykes Reber of the Muzzleloadershop.com which is now located in Berryville Arkansas Dovetail and mount them on to my Colt style percussion revolvers

 

[hawkeye2]

The Uberti Remington front sight has a dovetail base and is easy to find, good choice. You wouldn't have a picture of a one on a Colt to share would you? The fiber optic sight: ☹

 

[smoothshooter]

FishDFly has a good point regarding As Issue Matches. The N-SSA allows sight modification but the modified sight must closely resemble the original sight and cannot be adjustable (soldered). Most everyone I know can modify their sight or knows someone who can so there isn't much market there. The new front sight would need to be brand and model specific it it fitted a slot, screw-in hole or dovetail so you would end up stocking a number of different sights. If the gun is only used in matches or sport shooting where an accurate copy of the original is mandatory then there are plenty of aftermarket front sights mostly intended for rifles that are easily adapted, see the Track of the Wolf site. I have a Navy with 3 interchangable barrels of different lengths and I eventually intend to install this sight on all of them.

Fine Blade Front Sight, milled brass - Track of the Wolf

I built mine up wirh metal set epoxy, and dressed it down to the correct height several years ago. Still works fine.
An arbor that is too short can cause the gun to shoot high, as well. A common fix is to shim the forward face of the arbor with a very thin washer.

 

[reskite]

I've turned discs of brass and epoxied them in place. Worked really well.

 

[TNGhost]

I agree there is a definite need for taller sights on the Colts, if you want to hold dead on and have the bullet hit where you are aiming.

One other thing to consider when noting the target impact point on handguns, is that lower velocity loads print higher on the target than faster ones, at typical handgun ranges.

 

[Bad Karma]

I bought a few of the sights @Tom A Hawk mentioned. They are taller, still need a bit of work on the hammer but they look right and shoot right too. I’ve never had much trouble with the Colt sights but my eyes aren’t what they once were and sometimes the sights seem to grow a bit of fuzz. Must be some kinda mold or something.

 

[fistmil]

I have a London model navy about 44 years old. It also shot about 8" high at 25 yards. A gunsmith friend of mine simply replaced the front sight with a small brass rod. The rod was same diameter as the original sight,only taller. I simply shot it and filed rod (post) till it hit at POA at 25 yards. You would have look awfully hard to see the difference in the old verses new sights.

 

[M. De Land]

Interesting Thread. I think the wax-casting would be at least worth looking into. I have an 1860 Army and 1851 Navy that both have taller front sights which I got years ago from Kenny Howell (of conversion fame). Kenny said they are the same ones he adds to the conversions and are set to be dead on at 25 yards. At least then he was always so busy it took me a year just to get two front sights. But, along with an 11 degree cut on the forcing cone and a 3-lb. trigger job, they basically shoot where you point the gun. They are so much more accurate when shooting off hand at 7,15, and 25-yards. I have never tried them at 50 yards. Will leave that to the more serious, dedicated target shooters - which are probably using mostly Remingtons. LOL Speaking of which, I once saw an 1851 Navy that used a taller front sight from a Remington revolving RIFLE. It actually looked pretty good. I've heard that the taller front sights used on the Italian factory conversions and open tops are set for 50-yards. But I can't confirm this.
Here's a couple pics of another 1860 Army I have. In addition to the trigger and forcing cone jobs it has a dovetailed taller front sight made from a drawing I sent to Jim Stroh (of custom 45 Auto fame). Sorry for the poor photos.View attachment 9254 View attachment 9255 View attachment 9256
An interesting thing to note is the height of the front sight on original Colt Peacemakers.

Rick

If I had it to do over I would make a dove tail up front as it will give you windage adjustment as well instead of messing with arbor and wedge slots.

 

[rickystl]

That's interesting about the front sights for the Colt style conversions. Sounds like it might be right when I read those slightly taller sights are set for 50 yards. So those might still be a bit short (?) The taller front sights on mine come out to 5/16" tall. With the taller front sights I've never had to touch the rear sights. Used the same style sight on the .36 Navy. Just took a tad of filing to reach POA. The problem with using a taller "bead" style front sight on the Navy is that it would look a bit hokey IMO, and tear up a holster real quick.

The late Tom Ball said that the 11 degree cut on the forcing cone was one of the major changes that helped in the accuracy department. He said he even did this to Remingtons when they came in for work. Apparently, there is less deformity of the ball while entering the forcing cone. A few years ago, I remember meeting an old time SASS shooter. He mentioned that the early Colt Peacemaker clones the first thing they would do before shooting a new gun would be to have this forcing cone cut and a trigger job.

Rick

 

[M. De Land]

That's interesting about the front sights for the Colt style conversions. Sounds like it might be right when I read those slightly taller sights are set for 50 yards. So those might still be a bit short (?) The taller front sights on mine come out to 5/16" tall. With the taller front sights I've never had to touch the rear sights. Used the same style sight on the .36 Navy. Just took a tad of filing to reach POA. The problem with using a taller "bead" style front sight on the Navy is that it would look a bit hokey IMO, and tear up a holster real quick.

The late Tom Ball said that the 11 degree cut on the forcing cone was one of the major changes that helped in the accuracy department. He said he even did this to Remingtons when they came in for work. Apparently, there is less deformity of the ball while entering the forcing cone. A few years ago, I remember meeting an old time SASS shooter. He mentioned that the early Colt Peacemaker clones the first thing they would do before shooting a new gun would be to have this forcing cone cut and a trigger job.

Rick

I prefer 8 degrees for balls because it's shorter and believe11 is better for bullets. I want the ball to engage lands about half way into the cone. Either will produce good accuracy with the right loads. Remember were talking included angle here not per side angle. That would make each side 4 and 5.5 degrees respectively. I'm not sure any one could actually take advantage of the difference in actual accuracy but it makes for good print in magazine articles and forum fodder.